Reference opinion of students about the teaching method

Reference ID: 2018-00307Title:  Students perception on teaching methods used in various departments of M.B.B.S.Student: Mr. Yashwant Dayanidhi.G 3rd Term MBBS PESIMSR KuppamGuide:  Dr. Kiran GT              Professor,              Department of Forensic Medicine              PESIMSR KuppamINTRODUCTION:Medical education is totally based on teaching and learning. Students often get exposed to various teaching methods during their course. Teachers present the topics in different methods that will enhance the ability of the student to learn easily. However there is no particular rule saying a specific teaching method is more effective. It is the student interest and satisfaction gained justifies that the teaching method is effective. So the teaching method effectiveness is about the student learning.                        When it comes to students they often have the interest in finding the method selected by teacher is effective for learning or just a method with which the teacher is comfortable. They are the most qualified sources to report on the extent to which teaching method was informative, productive, satisfying or worth the time. Students have the right to express their satisfaction or dissatisfaction on a particular teaching method. This study was undertaken to reveal the teaching methods and find which methods are effective for an MBBS student to learn.Objectives of the study:· To  find  out  the  various  teaching  methods  used  by college teachers  to  teach under graduate students in different departments of MBBS.· To  explore  the  opinion  of  students  about  the  teaching  method  they  perceived  as the  most interesting and  best teaching method.· To  assess the reasons  for  perceiving  any  teaching  method  as  the  interesting  and best method.   I. Methodology (Materials & Methods): II. Study design: Cross-sectional study III. Study setting: PES Institute of Medical Sciences & Research (PESIMSR), Kuppam, Chitoor District, Andhra Pradesh IV. Study period: 2 months V. Study population: 248 medical student belonging to Second Professional MBBS and First Professional MBBS. VI. Sampling method: Stratified Random Sampling.  VII. Sample size: 250 students VIII. Inclusion Criteria: 1st year and 2nd year M.B.B.S students belonging to PESIMSR, Kuppam will be included in the study. IX. Exclusion Criteria: Students who are not willing to participate in the study. X. Study tools: Questionnaires relating to perception of teaching method. Method of collection of data: Students are  asked  to  rate  different  methods  of  teaching used  by  their  teachers  on  a  scale  of  1-  4,  1 being  the  least  important  and  4  being  the most  important  teaching  method.  The results of the study were compiled and analyzed by percentage method. XI. Statistical Analysis of data: Data of this study will be tabulated using Microsoft Excel 2007 software and the results will be analyzed using appropriate statistical methods. The results will be analyzed using Mann Whitney’s U test as they are non parametric data.XII. XIII.  Ethical clearance: Approval from Institutional Human Ethics Committee                                                                                                                                                                                will be sought before the onset of studyImplication: To determine which teaching method is appropriate and feasible for teaching for large group.XIV. XV. References:1. Braskamp, L. A. (2000). Toward a more holistic approach to assessing faculty as teachers. In  K. E. Ryan  (Ed.),  Evaluating teaching in higher education: A vision for the future. New directions for teaching and learning, 83, 109-123. San Francisco, Ca: Jossey-Bass.2. Braskamp,  L. A., & Ory, J. C. (1994).  Assessing faculty work: Enhancing individual and instructional performance.  San Francisco, CA: JosseyBass.Centra, J. A. (1993).  Reflective faculty evaluation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. 3. Chang, T.S. (2001).  The effect of system administration on faculty attitudes toward student ratings.  Hualien, Taiwan4. Franklin, J. (2001). Interpreting the numbers: Using a narrative to help others read student evaluations of your teaching accurately. In K. G. Lewis (Ed.) Techniques and strategies for interpreting student evaluations. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 87, 85-99. 5. Hoyt, M. P., & Pallett, W. H. (1999). ).  Appraising teaching effectiveness: Beyond student ratings. 6. Murray,H. G.(1994). Can Teaching Be Improved?7. Scriven, M.(1995). Student ratings offer useful input to Teacher evaluations. Practical assessment, Reasarch and Evaluation.8. Theall,  M.  and  Franklin,  J.  (2001).  Looking for Bias in all the Wrong Places  – A  Search  for  Truth  or  a  Witch  Hunt  in  Student  Ratings  of  Instruction?  In The Student Ratings Debate:  Are they Valid?  How Can We Best Use Them? 9. Theall, M. (n.d.). Students Ratings: Myths Vs Research Evidence. XVI.    XVII.